Children Who Experience Unintentional Injuries: Their Functional Profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unintentional injuries are accidents that pose a major health problem among school children. This study compared the functional behavior and executive function characteristics of school-aged children who experienced unintentional injuries with those of controls who had not been injured. We investigated the background characteristics of injured children, injury characteristics, and parents’ perceptions of the children’s functional behaviors and executive function abilities. The study included 53 children aged 6 years to 18 years. Of them, 32 had experienced unintentional injuries. The 21 children who had not experienced unintentional injuries served as a control group matched for age and living environment. Parents of both groups completed (1) a demographic questionnaire addressing their children’s background, daily functional behavior characteristics, and injury characteristics and (2) the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF). Sixty percent of the children in the research (injured) group had been prediagnosed with learning disabilities or attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, compared with no child in the control (uninjured) group. Most injuries were limb fractures (60%) and sustained outside the home (50%). Parents of children who had been injured expressed significantly more concerns about their children’s daily behavior than did parents of the control group and reported their children as usually, but not always, independent and responsible. Compared with the children in the uninjured group, the children in the injured group had significantly lower executive function abilities in the BRIEF’s eight subscales, total behavioral regulation and metacognitive indices, and global executive function scores ( p < .001 ). Children with certain diagnoses, functional behavior features, and deficient executive function abilities may be at risk for unintentional injuries. Raising occupational therapists’ awareness of these aspects may contribute to identifying, treating, and preventing accidental injuries among at-risk children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".